Molecular Imaging of Cardiovascular Disease

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Molecular and Translational Medicine book series (MOLEMED)

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease remains a leading killer in the United States. Although much progress has been made in diagnosing and treating this deadly disease, many questions remain. By studying disease pathogenesis at the genomic and proteomic levels, researchers have developed new strategies for managing disease, but only few have successfully translated these methods into routine clinical implementation. Molecular imaging enables the visualization of biological processes in vivo, providing valuable information that will likely improve clinical translation of these novel therapies. Molecular imaging utilizes imaging probes that interact with specific molecular targets which are then detected by an imaging system, such as single photon emission computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET), ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients can then be followed serially using noninvasive methodologies to evaluate disease progression and the effects of therapeutic interventions. Using these specialized probes, researchers have evaluated the role of the following biological processes in atherosclerosis and heart failure: inflammation, thrombosis, apoptosis, vascular remodeling, and angiogenesis. This chapter presents the state of the art in molecular imaging and its role in the management of cardiovascular disease.

Keywords

Positron Emission Tomography Molecular Imaging Positron Emission Tomography Tracer Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Magnetic Resonance Imaging Signal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Massoud TF, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in living subjects: seeing fundamental biological processes in a new light. Genes Dev. 2003;17(5):545–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weissleder R, Pittet MJ. Imaging in the era of molecular oncology. Nature. 2008;452(7187): 580–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen IY, Wu JC. Cardiovascular molecular imaging: focus on clinical translation. Circulation. 2011;123(4):425–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barbet J, Peltier P, Bardet S, et al. Radioimmunodetection of medullary thyroid carcinoma using indium-111 bivalent hapten and anti-CEA x anti-DTPA-indium bispecific antibody. J Nucl Med. 1998;39(7):1172–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goodwin DA, Meares CF, Osen M. Biological properties of biotin‚ chelate conjugates for pretargeted diagnosis and therapy with the avidin/biotin system. J Nucl Med. 1998;39(10):1813–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hu S, Shively L, Raubitschek A, et al. Minibody: a novel engineered anti-carcinoembryonic antigen antibody fragment (single-chain Fv-CH3) which exhibits rapid, high-level targeting of xenografts. Cancer Res. 1996;56(13):3055–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tjuvajev JG, Finn R, Watanabe K, et al. Noninvasive imaging of herpes virus thymidine kinase gene transfer and expression: a potential method for monitoring clinical gene therapy. Cancer Res. 1996;56(18):4087–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gambhir SS, Barrio JR, Phelps ME, et al. Imaging adenoviral-directed reporter gene expression in living animals with positron emission tomography. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96(5):2333–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weissleder R, Tung CH, Mahmood U, Bogdanov Jr A. In vivo imaging of tumors with protease-activated near-infrared fluorescent probes. Nat Biotechnol. 1999;17(4):375–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weissleder R, Moore A, Mahmood U, et al. In vivo magnetic resonance imaging of transgene expression. Nat Med. 2000;6(3):351–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goodwin DA, Meares CF, McCall MJ, McTigue M, Chaovapong W. Pre-targeted immunoscintigraphy of murine tumors with indium-111-labeled bifunctional haptens. J Nucl Med. 1988;29(2):226–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lewin M, Carlesso N, Tung CH, et al. Tat peptide-derivatized magnetic nanoparticles allow in vivo tracking and recovery of progenitor cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2000;18(4):410–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bogdanov Jr AA, Weissleder R, Frank HW, et al. A new macromolecule as a contrast agent for MR angiography: preparation, properties, and animal studies. Radiology. 1993;187(3):701–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sinusas AJ, Bengel F, Nahrendorf M, et al. Multimodality cardiovascular molecular imaging, part I. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1(3):244–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lindner JR. Molecular imaging of myocardial and vascular disorders with ultrasound. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3(2):204–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lindner JR, Dayton PA, Coggins MP, et al. Noninvasive imaging of inflammation by ultrasound detection of phagocytosed microbubbles. Circulation. 2000;102(5):531–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lindner JR, Coggins MP, Kaul S, Klibanov AL, Brandenburger GH, Ley K. Microbubble persistence in the microcirculation during ischemia/reperfusion and inflammation is caused by integrin- and complement-mediated adherence to activated leukocytes. Circulation. 2000;101(6):668–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Christiansen JP, Leong-Poi H, Klibanov AL, Kaul S, Lindner JR. Noninvasive imaging of myocardial reperfusion injury using leukocyte-targeted contrast echocardiography. Circulation. 2002;105(15):1764–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Behm CZ, Kaufmann BA, Carr C, et al. Molecular imaging of endothelial vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 expression and inflammatory cell recruitment during vasculogenesis and ischemia-mediated arteriogenesis. Circulation. 2008;117(22):2902–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kondo I, Ohmori K, Oshita A, et al. Leukocyte-targeted myocardial contrast echocardiography can assess the degree of acute allograft rejection in a rat cardiac transplantation model. Circulation. 2004;109(8):1056–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tsutsui JM, Xie F, Cano M, et al. Detection of retained microbubbles in carotid arteries with real-time low mechanical index imaging in the setting of endothelial dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(5):1036–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weller GE, Villanueva FS, Klibanov AL, Wagner WR. Modulating targeted adhesion of an ultrasound contrast agent to dysfunctional endothelium. Ann Biomed Eng. 2002;30(8):1012–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher NG, Christiansen JP, Klibanov A, Taylor RP, Kaul S, Lindner JR. Influence of microbubble surface charge on capillary transit and myocardial contrast enhancement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40(4):811–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Takalkar AM, Klibanov AL, Rychak JJ, Lindner JR, Ley K. Binding and detachment dynamics of microbubbles targeted to P-selectin under controlled shear flow. J Control Release. 2004;96(3):473–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weller GE, Villanueva FS, Tom EM, Wagner WR. Targeted ultrasound contrast agents: in vitro assessment of endothelial dysfunction and multi-targeting to ICAM-1 and sialyl Lewisx. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2005;92(6):780–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sosnovik DE, Nahrendorf M, Weissleder R. Magnetic nanoparticles for MR imaging: agents, techniques and cardiovascular applications. Basic Res Cardiol. 2008;103(2):122–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sosnovik DE. Molecular imaging in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: current perspective and future potential. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;19(1):59–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mulder WJ, Strijkers GJ, van Tilborg GA, Griffioen AW, Nicolay K. Lipid-based nanoparticles for contrast-enhanced MRI and molecular imaging. NMR Biomed. 2006;19(1):142–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shen T, Weissleder R, Papisov M, Bogdanov Jr A, Brady TJ. Monocrystalline iron oxide nanocompounds (MION): physicochemical properties. Magn Reson Med. 1993;29(5):599–604.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wunderbaldinger P, Josephson L, Weissleder R. Crosslinked iron oxides (CLIO): a new platform for the development of targeted MR contrast agents. Acad Radiol. 2002;9 Suppl 2:S304–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weissleder R, Stark DD, Engelstad BL, et al. Superparamagnetic iron oxide: pharmacokinetics and toxicity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;152(1):167–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Heyn C, Bowen CV, Rutt BK, Foster PJ. Detection threshold of single SPIO-labeled cells with FIESTA. Magn Reson Med. 2005;53(2):312–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    van den Bos EJ, Baks T, Moelker AD, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of haemorrhage within reperfused myocardial infarcts: possible interference with iron oxide-labelled cell tracking? Eur Heart J. 2006;27(13):1620–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stuber M, Gilson WD, Schar M, et al. Positive contrast visualization of iron oxide-labeled stem cells using inversion-recovery with ON-resonant water suppression (IRON). Magn Reson Med. 2007;58(5):1072–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ronald JA, Chen JW, Chen Y, et al. Enzyme-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging targeting myeloperoxidase identifies active inflammation in experimental rabbit atherosclerotic plaques. Circulation. 2009;120(7):592–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brenner W, Aicher A, Eckey T, et al. 111In-labeled CD34+ hematopoietic progenitor cells in a rat myocardial infarction model. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(3):512–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Flogel U, Ding Z, Hardung H, et al. In vivo monitoring of inflammation after cardiac and cerebral ischemia by fluorine magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation. 2008;118(2):140–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lanza GM, Winter PM, Neubauer AM, Caruthers SD, Hockett FD, Wickline SA. 1H/19F magnetic resonance molecular imaging with perfluorocarbon nanoparticles. Curr Top Dev Biol. 2005;70:57–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hua J, Dobrucki LW, Sadeghi MM, et al. Noninvasive imaging of angiogenesis with a 99mTc-labeled peptide targeted at alphavbeta3 integrin after murine hindlimb ischemia. Circulation. 2005;111(24):3255–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sinusas AJ. Imaging of angiogenesis. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11(5):617–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nahrendorf M, Jaffer FA, Kelly KA, et al. Noninvasive vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 imaging identifies inflammatory activation of cells in atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2006;114(14):1504–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lin S, Xie X, Patel M, et al. Quantum dot imaging for embryonic stem cells. BMC Biotechnol. 2007;7(1):67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wester HJ, Schottelius M. Fluorine-18 labeling of peptides and proteins. Ernst Schering Res Found Workshop. 2007;62:79–111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shokeen M, Fettig NM, Rossin R. Synthesis, in vitro and in vivo evaluation of radiolabeled nanoparticles. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;52(3):267–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yaghoubi SS, Gambhir SS. PET imaging of herpes simplex virus type 1 thymidine kinase (HSV1-tk) or mutant HSV1-sr39tk reporter gene expression in mice and humans using [18F]FHBG. Nat Protoc. 2006;1(6):3069–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yaghoubi SS, Jensen MC, Satyamurthy N, et al. Noninvasive detection of therapeutic cytolytic T cells with 18F-FHBG PET in a patient with glioma. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2009;6(1):53–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Danthi SN, Pandit SD, Li KC. A primer on molecular biology for imagers: VII. Molecular imaging probes. Acad Radiol. 2004;11(9):1047–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nahrendorf M, Zhang H, Hembrador S, et al. Nanoparticle PET-CT imaging of macrophages in inflammatory atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2008;117(3):379–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ntziachristos V. Fluorescence molecular imaging. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2006;8(1):1–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhao H, Doyle TC, Coquoz O, Kalish F, Rice BW, Contag CH. Emission spectra of bioluminescent reporters and interaction with mammalian tissue determine the sensitivity of detection in vivo. J Biomed Opt. 2005;10(4):41210.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Loening AM, Fenn TD, Wu AM, Gambhir SS. Consensus guided mutagenesis of Renilla luciferase yields enhanced stability and light output. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2006;19(9):391–400.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Calfon MA, Vinegoni C, Ntziachristos V, Jaffer FA. Intravascular near-infrared fluorescence molecular imaging of atherosclerosis: toward coronary arterial visualization of biologically high-risk plaques. J Biomed Opt. 2010;15(1):011107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Budinger T, Lauterbur P. Nuclear magnetic resonance technology for medical studies. Science. 1984;226(4672):288–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hyafil F, Cornily JC, Rudd JH, Machac J, Feldman LJ, Fayad ZA. Quantification of inflammation within rabbit atherosclerotic plaques using the macrophage-specific CT contrast agent N1177: a comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT and histology. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(6):959–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Pan D, Williams TA, Senpan A, et al. Detecting vascular biosignatures with a colloidal, radio-opaque polymeric nanoparticle. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131(42):15522–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Qin S, Caskey CF, Ferrara KW. Ultrasound contrast microbubbles in imaging and therapy: physical principles and engineering. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54(6):R27–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Shi WT, Forsberg F. Ultrasonic characterization of the nonlinear properties of contrast microbubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2000;26(1):93–104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    De Jong N, Bouakaz A, Frinking P. Basic acoustic properties of microbubbles. Echocardiography. 2002;19(3):229–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Goertz DE, Frijlink ME, Tempel D, et al. Contrast harmonic intravascular ultrasound: a feasibility study for vasa vasorum imaging. Invest Radiol. 2006;41(8):631–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bouakaz A, Versluis M, de Jong N. High-speed optical observations of contrast agent destruction. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2005;31(3):391–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Zhao S, Kruse DE, Ferrara KW, Dayton PA. Selective imaging of adherent targeted ultrasound contrast agents. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52(8):2055–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kircher MF, Grimm J, Swirski FK, et al. Noninvasive in vivo imaging of monocyte trafficking to atherosclerotic lesions. Circulation. 2008;117(3):388–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Nahrendorf M, Swirski FK, Aikawa E, et al. The healing myocardium sequentially mobilizes two monocyte subsets with divergent and complementary functions. J Exp Med. 2007;204(12):3037–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Swirski FK, Pittet MJ, Kircher MF, et al. Monocyte accumulation in mouse atherogenesis is progressive and proportional to extent of disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103(27): 10340–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Auffray C, Fogg D, Garfa M, et al. Monitoring of blood vessels and tissues by a population of monocytes with patrolling behavior. Science. 2007;317(5838):666–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Nahrendorf M, Streif JU, Hiller KH, et al. Multimodal functional cardiac MRI in creatine kinase-deficient mice reveals subtle abnormalities in myocardial perfusion and mechanics. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2006;290(6):H2516–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Bates SM, Lister-James J, Julian JA, Taillefer R, Moyer BR, Ginsberg JS. Imaging characteristics of a novel technetium Tc 99m-labeled platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist in patients With acute deep vein thrombosis or a history of deep vein thrombosis. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(4):452–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Botnar RM, Buecker A, Wiethoff AJ, et al. In vivo magnetic resonance imaging of coronary thrombosis using a fibrin-binding molecular magnetic resonance contrast agent. Circulation. 2004;110(11):1463–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Jaffer FA, Tung CH, Wykrzykowska JJ, et al. Molecular imaging of factor XIIIa activity in thrombosis using a novel, near-infrared fluorescent contrast agent that covalently links to thrombi. Circulation. 2004;110(2):170–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    McAteer MA, Schneider JE, Ali ZA, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of endothelial adhesion molecules in mouse atherosclerosis using dual-targeted microparticles of iron oxide. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2008;28(1):77–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Nair SA, Kolodziej AF, Bhole G, Greenfield MT, McMurry TJ, Caravan P. Monovalent and bivalent fibrin-specific MRI contrast agents for detection of thrombus. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2008;47(26):4918–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Spuentrup E, Fausten B, Kinzel S, et al. Molecular magnetic resonance imaging of atrial clots in a swine model. Circulation. 2005;112(3):396–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Sirol M, Fuster V, Badimon JJ, et al. Chronic thrombus detection with in vivo magnetic resonance imaging and a fibrin-targeted contrast agent. Circulation. 2005;112(11):1594–600.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Spuentrup E, Botnar RM, Wiethoff AJ, et al. MR imaging of thrombi using EP-2104R, a fibrin-specific contrast agent: initial results in patients. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(9): 1995–2005.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Faust A, Wagner S, Law MP, et al. The nonpeptidyl caspase binding radioligand (S)-1-(4-(2-[18F]Fluoroethoxy)-benzyl)-5-[1-(2-methoxymethylpyrrolidinyl)sulfonyl]isatin ([18F]CbR) as potential positron emission tomography-compatible apoptosis imaging agent. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;51(1):67–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Korngold EC, Jaffer FA, Weissleder R, Sosnovik DE. Noninvasive imaging of apoptosis in cardiovascular disease. Heart Fail Rev. 2008;13(2):163–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Dumont EA, Reutelingsperger CP, Smits JF, et al. Real-time imaging of apoptotic cell-membrane changes at the single-cell level in the beating murine heart. Nat Med. 2001;7(12):1352–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Liu Z, Zhao M, Zhu X, Furenlid LR, Chen YC, Barrett HH. In vivo dynamic imaging of myocardial cell death using 99mTc-labeled C2A domain of synaptotagmin I in a rat model of ischemia and reperfusion. Nucl Med Biol. 2007;34(8):907–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Narula J, Acio ER, Narula N, et al. Annexin-V imaging for noninvasive detection of cardiac allograft rejection. Nat Med. 2001;7(12):1347–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Sosnovik DE, Schellenberger EA, Nahrendorf M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of cardiomyocyte apoptosis with a novel magneto-optical nanoparticle. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54(3):718–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Hiller KH, Waller C, Nahrendorf M, Bauer WR, Jakob PM. Assessment of cardiovascular apoptosis in the isolated rat heart by magnetic resonance molecular imaging. Mol Imaging. 2006;5(2):115–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Narula J, Petrov A, Bianchi C, et al. Noninvasive localization of experimental atherosclerotic lesions with mouse/human chimeric Z2D3 F(ab′)2 specific for the proliferating smooth muscle cells of human atheroma. Imaging with conventional and negative charge-modified antibody fragments. Circulation. 1995;92(3):474–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Narula J, Strauss HW. Predicting the likelihood of postangioplastic restenosis: a proliferating challenge for nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med. 2000;41(9):1541–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Johnson LL, Schofield LM, Verdesca SA, et al. In vivo uptake of radiolabeled antibody to proliferating smooth muscle cells in a swine model of coronary stent restenosis. J Nucl Med. 2000;41(9):1535–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Shattil SJ. Function and regulation of the beta 3 integrins in hemostasis and vascular biology. Thromb Haemost. 1995;74(1):149–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Murphy JF, Bordet JC, Wyler B, et al. The vitronectin receptor (alpha v beta 3) is implicated, in cooperation with P-selectin and platelet-activating factor, in the adhesion of monocytes to activated endothelial cells. Biochem J. 1994;304(Pt 2):537–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Huang S, Endo RI, Nemerow GR. Upregulation of integrins alpha v beta 3 and alpha v beta 5 on human monocytes and T lymphocytes facilitates adenovirus-mediated gene delivery. J Virol. 1995;69(4):2257–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Sadeghi MM, Krassilnikova S, Zhang J, et al. Detection of injury-induced vascular remodeling by targeting activated alphavbeta3 integrin in vivo. Circulation. 2004;110(1):84–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Cyrus T, Zhang H, Allen JS, et al. Intramural delivery of rapamycin with alphavbeta3-targeted paramagnetic nanoparticles inhibits stenosis after balloon injury. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2008;28(5):820–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Schafers M, Riemann B, Kopka K, et al. Scintigraphic imaging of matrix metalloproteinase activity in the arterial wall in vivo. Circulation. 2004;109(21):2554–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Zhang J, Nie L, Razavian M, et al. Molecular imaging of activated matrix metalloproteinases in vascular remodeling. Circulation. 2008;118(19):1953–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Folkman J. The role of angiogenesis in tumor growth. Semin Cancer Biol. 1992;3(2):65–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Carmeliet P. Angiogenesis in health and disease. Nat Med. 2003;9(6):653–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kim S, Bell K, Mousa SA, Varner JA. Regulation of angiogenesis in vivo by ligation of integrin alpha5beta1 with the central cell-binding domain of fibronectin. Am J Pathol. 2000;156(4):1345–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Brooks PC, Clark RA, Cheresh DA. Requirement of vascular integrin alpha v beta 3 for angiogenesis. Science. 1994;264(5158):569–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lu E, Wagner WR, Schellenberger U, et al. Targeted in vivo labeling of receptors for vascular endothelial growth factor: approach to identification of ischemic tissue. Circulation. 2003;108(1):97–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Rodriguez-Porcel M, Cai W, Gheysens O, et al. Imaging of VEGF receptor in a rat myocardial infarction model using PET. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(4):667–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Egami K, Murohara T, Aoki M, Matsuishi T. Ischemia-induced angiogenesis: role of inflammatory response mediated by P-selectin. J Leukoc Biol. 2006;79(5):971–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Heil M, Ziegelhoeffer T, Wagner S, et al. Collateral artery growth (arteriogenesis) after experimental arterial occlusion is impaired in mice lacking CC-chemokine receptor-2. Circ Res. 2004;94(5):671–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    GrK H. Inflammation, atherosclerosis, and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(16):1685–95.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Kaufmann BA, Lewis C, Xie A, Mirza-Mohd A, Lindner JR. Detection of recent myocardial ischaemia by molecular imaging of P-selectin with targeted contrast echocardiography. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(16):2011–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Hamilton AJ, Huang SL, Warnick D, et al. Intravascular ultrasound molecular imaging of atheroma components in vivo. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(3):453–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kaufmann BA, Sanders JM, Davis C, et al. Molecular imaging of inflammation in atherosclerosis with targeted ultrasound detection of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1. Circulation. 2007;116(3):276–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Pan H, Myerson JW, Yang X, Lanza GM, Wickline SA. Abstract 18638: quantification of endothelial activation in atherosclerosis in vivo with fluorine magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. Circulation. 2010;122(21_MeetingAbstracts):A18638.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Nahrendorf M, Keliher E, Panizzi P, et al. 18F-4V for PET-CT imaging of VCAM-1 expression in atherosclerosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(10):1213–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A, Kolodgie FD. Pathology of the unstable plaque. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2002;44(5):349–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Shah PK, Falk E, Badimon JJ, et al. Human monocyte-derived macrophages induce collagen breakdown in fibrous caps of atherosclerotic plaques. Potential role of matrix-degrading metalloproteinases and implications for plaque rupture. Circulation. 1995;92(6):1565–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Ogawa M, Ishino S, Mukai T, et al. (18)F-FDG accumulation in atherosclerotic plaques: immunohistochemical and PET imaging study. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(7):1245–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Stary HC, Blankenhorn DH, Chandler AB, et al. A definition of the intima of human arteries and of its atherosclerosis-prone regions. A report from the Committee on Vascular Lesions of the Council on Arteriosclerosis, American Heart Association. Arterioscler Thromb. 1992;12(1):120–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Tawakol A, Migrino RQ, Hoffmann U, et al. Noninvasive in vivo measurement of vascular inflammation with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12(3):294–301.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Rudd JH, Warburton EA, Fryer TD, et al. Imaging atherosclerotic plaque inflammation with [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Circulation. 2002;105(23):2708–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Tawakol A, Migrino RQ, Bashian GG, et al. In vivo 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging provides a noninvasive measure of carotid plaque inflammation in patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(9):1818–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Rudd JH, Myers KS, Bansilal S, et al. (18)Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging of atherosclerotic plaque inflammation is highly reproducible: implications for atherosclerosis therapy trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(9):892–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Tahara N, Kai H, Ishibashi M, et al. Simvastatin attenuates plaque inflammation: evaluation by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(9):1825–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Davie N, Gerasimovskaya E, Hofmeister S, et al. Pulmonary artery adventitial fibroblasts cooperate with vasa vasorum endothelial cells to regulate vasa vasorum neovascularization: a process mediated by hypoxia and endothelin-1. Am J Pathol. 2006;168(6):1793–807.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Alexanderson E, Slomka P, Cheng V, et al. Fusion of positron emission tomography and coronary computed tomographic angiography identifies fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the left main coronary artery soft plaque. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15(6):841–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Wykrzykowska J, Lehman S, Williams G, et al. Imaging of inflamed and vulnerable plaque in coronary arteries with 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with suppression of myocardial uptake using a low-carbohydrate, high-fat preparation. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(4):563–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Izquierdo-Garcia D, Davies JR, Graves MJ, et al. Comparison of methods for magnetic resonance-guided [18-F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in human carotid arteries: reproducibility, partial volume correction, and correlation between methods. Stroke. 2009;40(1):86–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Rogers IS, Nasir K, Figueroa AL, et al. Feasibility of FDG imaging of the coronary arteries: comparison between acute coronary syndrome and stable angina. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3(4):388–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    McLachlan SJ, Francisco JC, Pernicone JR, Hasso AN. Efficacy evaluation of gadoteridol for MR angiography of intracranial vascular lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;4(3):405–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Kooi ME, Cappendijk VC, Cleutjens KBJM, et al. Accumulation of ultrasmall superparamagnetic particles of iron oxide in human atherosclerotic plaques can be detected by in vivo magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation. 2003;107(19):2453–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Howarth SPS, Li Z-Y, Tang TY, Graves MJ, U-King-Im JM, Gillard JH. In vivo positive contrast IRON sequence and quantitative T2* measurement confirms inflammatory burden in a patient with asymptomatic carotid atheroma after USPIO-enhanced MR imaging. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(3):446–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Tang TY, Howarth SPS, Miller SR, et al. The ATHEROMA (Atorvastatin Therapy: Effects on Reduction of Macrophage Activity) Study: evaluation using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in carotid disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(22):2039–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Nasu K, Tsuchikane E, Katoh O, et al. Accuracy of in vivo coronary plaque morphology assessment: a validation study of in vivo virtual histology compared with in vitro histopathology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(12):2405–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    J-o D, Aikawa M, Tung C-H, et al. Inflammation in atherosclerosis: visualizing matrix metalloproteinase action in macrophages in vivo. Circulation. 2006;114(1):55–62.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Jaffer FA, Vinegoni C, John MC, et al. Real-time catheter molecular sensing of inflammation in proteolytically active atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2008;118(18):1802–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Kietselaer BL, Reutelingsperger CP, Heidendal GA, et al. Noninvasive detection of plaque instability with use of radiolabeled annexin A5 in patients with carotid-artery atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(14):1472–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Kietselaer BL, Reutelingsperger CP, Boersma HH, et al. Noninvasive detection of programmed cell loss with 99mTc-labeled annexin A5 in heart failure. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(4):562–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Winter PM, Morawski AM, Caruthers SD, et al. Molecular imaging of angiogenesis in early-stage atherosclerosis with alpha(v)beta3-integrin-targeted nanoparticles. Circulation. 2003;108(18):2270–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Burtea C, Laurent S, Murariu O, et al. Molecular imaging of alpha v beta3 integrin expression in atherosclerotic plaques with a mimetic of RGD peptide grafted to Gd-DTPA. Cardiovasc Res. 2008;78(1):148–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Matter CM, Schuler PK, Alessi P, et al. Molecular imaging of atherosclerotic plaques using a human antibody against the extra-domain B of fibronectin. Circ Res. 2004;95(12):1225–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Graf K, Grafe M, Fleck E. Cardiovascular diseases as target for imaging. Basic Res Cardiol. 2008;103(2):82–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Rodriguez-Porcel M. Non-invasive monitoring of angiogenesis in cardiology. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep. 2009;2(1):59–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Farb A, Burke AP, Tang AL, et al. Coronary plaque erosion without rupture into a lipid core: a frequent cause of coronary thrombosis in sudden coronary death. Circulation. 1996;93(7):1354–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Kramer MCA, Rittersma SZH, de Winter RJ, et al. Relationship of thrombus healing to underlying plaque morphology in sudden coronary death. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(2):122–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Heidt T, Deininger F, Peter K, et al. Activated platelets in carotid artery thrombosis in mice can be selectively targeted with a radiolabeled single-chain antibody. PLoS One. 2011;6(3):e18446.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Alonso A, Della Martina A, Stroick M, et al. Molecular imaging of human thrombus with novel abciximab immunobubbles and ultrasound. Stroke. 2007;38(5):1508–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Spuentrup E, Katoh M, Wiethoff AJ, et al. Molecular coronary MR imaging of human thrombi using EP-2104R, a fibrin-targeted contrast agent: experimental study in a swine model. Rofo. 2007;179(11):1166–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Spuentrup E, Buecker A, Katoh M, et al. Molecular magnetic resonance imaging of coronary thrombosis and pulmonary emboli with a novel fibrin-targeted contrast agent. Circulation. 2005;111(11):1377–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Vymazal J, Spuentrup E, Cardenas-Molina G, et al. Thrombus imaging with fibrin-specific gadolinium-based MR contrast agent EP-2104R: results of a phase II clinical study of feasibility. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(11):697–704.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Katoh M, Haage P, Wiethoff AJ, et al. Molecular magnetic resonance imaging of deep vein thrombosis using a fibrin-targeted contrast agent: a feasibility study. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(3):146–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Klink A, Lancelot E, Ballet S, et al. Magnetic resonance molecular imaging of thrombosis in an arachidonic acid mouse model using an activated platelet targeted probe. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010;30(3):403–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Lloyd-Jones D, Adams RJ, Brown TM, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics–2010 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2010;121(7):e46–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Neubauer S. The failing heart – an engine out of fuel. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(11):1140–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    King LM, Opie LH. Glucose and glycogen utilisation in myocardial ischemia – changes in metabolism and consequences for the myocyte. Mol Cell Biochem. 1998;180(1):3–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Tillisch J, Brunken R, Marshall R, et al. Reversibility of cardiac wall-motion abnormalities predicted by positron tomography. N Engl J Med. 1986;314(14):884–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Nowak B, Sinha AM, Schaefer WM, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy homogenizes myocardial glucose metabolism and perfusion in dilated cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch block. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41(9):1523–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Inoue N, Takahashi N, Ishikawa T, et al. Reverse perfusion-metabolism mismatch predicts good prognosis in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy: a pilot study. Circ J. 2007;71(1):126–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Chung ES, Leon AR, Tavazzi L, et al. Results of the predictors of response to CRT (PROSPECT) trial. Circulation. 2008;117(20):2608–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Bristow MR, Ginsburg R, Minobe W, et al. Decreased catecholamine sensitivity and beta-adrenergic-receptor density in failing human hearts. N Engl J Med. 1982;307(4):205–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Narula J, Sarkar K. A conceptual paradox of MIBG uptake in heart failure: retention with incontinence! J Nucl Cardiol. 2003;10(6):700–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Jacobson AF, Senior R, Cerqueira MD, et al. Myocardial iodine-123 meta-iodobenzylguanidine imaging and cardiac events in heart failure: results of the prospective ADMIRE-HF (AdreView Myocardial Imaging for Risk Evaluation in Heart Failure) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(20):2212–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Glowniak JV, Kilty JE, Amara SG, Hoffman BJ, Turner FE. Evaluation of metaiodobenzylguanidine uptake by the norepinephrine, dopamine and serotonin transporters. J Nucl Med. 1993;34(7):1140–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Sisson JC, Wieland DM, Sherman P, Mangner TJ, Tobes MC, Jacques Jr S. Metaiodobenzylguanidine as an index of the adrenergic nervous system integrity and function. J Nucl Med. 1987;28(10):1620–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Verberne HJ, Brewster LM, Somsen GA, van Eck-Smit BLF. Prognostic value of myocardial 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) parameters in patients with heart failure: a systematic review. Eur Hear J. 2008;29(9):1147–59.Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Meredith IT, Broughton A, Jennings GL, Esler MD. Evidence of a selective increase in cardiac sympathetic activity in patients with sustained ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med. 1991;325(9):618–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Tamaki S, Yamada T, Okuyama Y, et al. Cardiac iodine-123 metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging predicts sudden cardiac death independently of left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with chronic heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction: results from a comparative study with signal-averaged electrocardiogram, heart rate variability, and QT dispersion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(5):426–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Nagahara D, Nakata T, Hashimoto A, et al. Predicting the need for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator using cardiac metaiodobenzylguanidine activity together with plasma natriuretic peptide concentration or left ventricular function. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(2):225–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Hofstra L, Liem IH, Dumont EA, et al. Visualisation of cell death in vivo in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 2000;356(9225):209–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Sosnovik DE, Garanger E, Aikawa E, et al. Molecular MRI of cardiomyocyte apoptosis with simultaneous delayed-enhancement MRI distinguishes apoptotic and necrotic myocytes in vivo/CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(6):460–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Sosnovik DE, Nahrendorf M, Deliolanis N, et al. Fluorescence tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of myocardial macrophage infiltration in infarcted myocardium in vivo. Circulation. 2007;115(11):1384–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Nahrendorf M, Sosnovik DE, Waterman P, et al. Dual channel optical tomographic imaging of leukocyte recruitment and protease activity in the healing myocardial infarct. Circ Res. 2007;100(8):1218–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    van den Borne SWM, Isobe S, Verjans JW, et al. Molecular imaging of interstitial alterations in remodeling myocardium after myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(24):2017–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Kalinowski L, Dobrucki LW, Meoli DF, et al. Targeted imaging of hypoxia-induced integrin activation in myocardium early after infarction. J Appl Physiol. 2008;104(5):1504–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Johnson LL, Schofield L, Donahay T, Bouchard M, Poppas A, Haubner R. Radiolabeled arginine-glycine-aspartic acid peptides to image angiogenesis in swine model of hibernating myocardium. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1(4):500–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Higuchi T, Bengel FM, Seidl S, et al. Assessment of alphavbeta3 integrin expression after myocardial infarction by positron emission tomography. Cardiovasc Res. 2008;78(2):395–403.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Leong-Poi H, Christiansen J, Heppner P, et al. Assessment of endogenous and therapeutic arteriogenesis by contrast ultrasound molecular imaging of integrin expression. Circulation. 2005;111(24):3248–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Nahrendorf M, Aikawa E, Figueiredo J-L, et al. Transglutaminase activity in acute infarcts predicts healing outcome and left ventricular remodelling: implications for FXIII therapy and antithrombin use in myocardial infarction. Eur Hear J. 2008;29(4):445–54.Google Scholar
  169. 169.
    van den Borne SWM, Isobe S, Zandbergen HR, et al. Molecular Imaging for Efficacy of Pharmacologic Intervention in Myocardial Remodeling. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(2):187–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Segers VFM, Lee RT. Stem-cell therapy for cardiac disease. Nature. 2008;451(7181):937–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Hansson EM, Lindsay ME, Chien KR. Regeneration next: toward heart stem cell therapeutics. Cell Stem Cell. 2009;5(4):364–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Lipinski MJ, Biondi-Zoccai GGL, Abbate A, et al. Impact of intracoronary cell therapy on left ventricular function in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(18):1761–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Abdel-Latif A, Bolli R, Tleyjeh IM, et al. Adult bone marrow-derived cells for cardiac repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(10):989–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Meyer GP, Wollert KC, Lotz J, et al. Intracoronary bone marrow cell transfer after myocardial infarction: eighteen months’ follow-up data from the randomized, controlled BOOST (BOne marrOw transfer to enhance ST-elevation infarct regeneration) trial. Circulation. 2006;113(10):1287–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Traverse JH, McKenna DH, Harvey K, et al. Results of a phase 1, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of bone marrow mononuclear stem cell administration in patients following ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2010;160(3):428–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Wu JC. Molecular imaging: antidote to cardiac stem cell controversy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(20):1661–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  177. 177.
    Tai YC, Chatziioannou AF, Yang Y, et al. MicroPET II: design, development and initial performance of an improved microPET scanner for small-animal imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48(11):1519–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Wu JC, Tseng JR, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging of cardiovascular gene products. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11(4):491–505.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Rahmim A, Zaidi H. PET versus SPECT: strengths, limitations and challenges. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29(3):193–207.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Love C, Palestro CJ. Radionuclide imaging of infection. J Nucl Med Technol. 2004;32(2):47–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Aicher A, Brenner W, Zuhayra M, et al. Assessment of the tissue distribution of transplanted human endothelial progenitor cells by radioactive labeling. Circulation. 2003;107(16):2134–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Bindslev L, Haack-Sorensen M, Bisgaard K, et al. Labelling of human mesenchymal stem cells with indium-111 for SPECT imaging: effect on cell proliferation and differentiation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(10):1171–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  183. 183.
    Barbash IM, Chouraqui P, Baron J, et al. Systemic delivery of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells to the infarcted myocardium: feasibility, cell migration, and body distribution. Circulation. 2003;108(7):863–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  184. 184.
    Chen IY, Greve JM, Gheysens O, et al. Comparison of optical bioluminescence reporter gene and superparamagnetic iron oxide MR contrast agent as cell markers for noninvasive imaging of cardiac cell transplantation. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11(3):178–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  185. 185.
    Lee CH, Kim EY, Jeon K, et al. Simple, efficient, and reproducible gene transfection of mouse embryonic stem cells by magnetofection. Stem Cells Dev. 2008;17(1):133–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  186. 186.
    Walczak P, Kedziorek DA, Gilad AA, Lin S, Bulte JW. Instant MR labeling of stem cells using magnetoelectroporation. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54(4):769–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  187. 187.
    Walczak P, Ruiz-Cabello J, Kedziorek DA, et al. Magnetoelectroporation: improved labeling of neural stem cells and leukocytes for cellular magnetic resonance imaging using a single FDA-approved agent. Nanomedicine. 2006;2(2):89–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  188. 188.
    Bulte JW, Douglas T, Witwer B, et al. Magnetodendrimers allow endosomal magnetic labeling and in vivo tracking of stem cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2001;19(12):1141–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Himes N, Min JY, Lee R, et al. In vivo MRI of embryonic stem cells in a mouse model of myocardial infarction. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52(5):1214–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Beeres SL, Bengel FM, Bartunek J, et al. Role of imaging in cardiac stem cell therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(11):1137–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Shapiro EM, Skrtic S, Sharer K, Hill JM, Dunbar CE, Koretsky AP. MRI detection of single particles for cellular imaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101(30):10901–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Leor J, Rozen L, Zuloff-Shani A, et al. Ex vivo activated human macrophages improve healing, remodeling, and function of the infarcted heart. Circulation. 2006;114(1 Suppl):I94–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  193. 193.
    Amsalem Y, Mardor Y, Feinberg MS, et al. Iron-oxide labeling and outcome of transplanted mesenchymal stem cells in the infarcted myocardium. Circulation. 2007;116(11 Suppl):I38–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  194. 194.
    Wu JC. Can radionuclide imaging predict future response to stem cell therapy? J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15(3):308–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  195. 195.
    Wu JC, Cao F, Dutta S, et al. Proteomic analysis of reporter genes for molecular imaging of transplanted embryonic stem cells. Proteomics. 2006;6(23):6234–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  196. 196.
    Wu JC, Spin JM, Cao F, et al. Transcriptional profiling of reporter genes used for molecular imaging of embryonic stem cell transplantation. Physiol Genomics. 2006;25(1):29–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  197. 197.
    Cao F, Lin S, Xie X, et al. In vivo visualization of embryonic stem cell survival, proliferation, and migration after cardiac delivery. Circulation. 2006;113(7):1005–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  198. 198.
    Li Z, Lee A, Huang M, et al. Imaging survival and function of transplanted cardiac resident stem cells. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(14):1229–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  199. 199.
    Ponomarev V, Doubrovin M, Shavrin A, et al. A human-derived reporter gene for noninvasive imaging in humans: mitochondrial thymidine kinase type 2. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(5):819–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  200. 200.
    Chen IY, Gheysens O, Ray S, et al. Indirect imaging of cardiac-specific transgene expression using a bidirectional two-step transcriptional amplification strategy. Gene Ther. 2010;17(7):827–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  201. 201.
    Loening AM, Wu AM, Gambhir SS. Red-shifted Renilla reniformis luciferase variants for imaging in living subjects. Nat Methods. 2007;4(8):641–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  202. 202.
    Krishnan M, Park JM, Cao F, et al. Effects of epigenetic modulation on reporter gene expression: implications for stem cell imaging. FASEB J. 2006;20(1):106–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  203. 203.
    Hofmann M, Wollert KC, Meyer GP, et al. Monitoring of bone marrow cell homing into the infarcted human myocardium. Circulation. 2005;111(17):2198–202.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  204. 204.
    Karpov R, Popov S, Markov V, et al. Autologous mononuclear bone marrow cells during reparative regeneratrion after acute myocardial infarction. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2005;140(5):640–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  205. 205.
    Goussetis E, Manginas A, Koutelou M, et al. Intracoronary infusion of CD133+ and CD133-CD34+ selected autologous bone marrow progenitor cells in patients with chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy: cell isolation, adherence to the infarcted area, and body distribution. Stem Cells. 2006;24(10):2279–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  206. 206.
    Kang WJ, Kang H-J, Kim H-S, Chung J-K, Lee MC, Lee DS. Tissue distribution of 18F-FDG-labeled peripheral hematopoietic stem cells after intracoronary administration in patients with myocardial infarction. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(8):1295–301.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  207. 207.
    Blocklet D, Toungouz M, Berkenboom G, et al. Myocardial homing of nonmobilized peripheral-blood CD34+ cells after intracoronary injection. Stem Cells. 2006;24(2):333–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  208. 208.
    Schachinger V, Aicher A, Dobert N, et al. Pilot trial on determinants of progenitor cell recruitment to the infarcted human myocardium. Circulation. 2008;118(14):1425–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  209. 209.
    Dedobbeleer C, Blocklet D, Toungouz M, et al. Myocardial homing and coronary endothelial function after autologous blood CD34+ progenitor cells intracoronary injection in the chronic phase of myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2009;53(6):480–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MedicineStanford University School of MedicineStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyStanford University School of MedicineStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations